The elections in the five states, which represent virtually every region barring the west, are in the homestretch, capping a campaign that has been overrun by "national" (actually pseudo-national) issues having nothing to do with people's preoccupations emanating from the state of their local economies. The Rafale defence deal, cows, Ayodhya and 'urban Naxals' scarcely resonated with the electorate but unsold sacks of agricultural produce - whose sight brought tears to the eyes of farmers - for want of hard cash in the rural market did. Rahul Gandhi's quick-fire response to the agrarian distress in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh was - what else? - promises of loan waivers for farmers. The BJP played copycat in MP although it is learnt that Prime Minister Narendra Modi refused to listen to Raman Singh's entreaties for a similar counter in Chhattisgarh where loan recovery from agriculturists has noticeably dropped after Rahul's declaration.

When things went swimmingly, Modi and BJP president Amit Shah viewed every victory in a state, be it an assembly or a local body poll, as a referendum on the Centre's ability to be responsive and deliver answers. This trend in reading electoral verdicts is a new one. The Congress, which helmed the UPA government for 10 years, tactfully took its many defeats in state elections on its chin, decoupling the reverses from the Centre's performance and Sonia Gandhi's leadership.

In 2008, months before the 2009 parliamentary election, the BJP romped home in Karnataka, MP and Chhattisgarh but few, if any, amplified the results as a precursor of what was to come the following year. Despite the state setbacks, the Congress won for itself an enhanced second mandate. Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee lived fairly comfortably with the vagaries of state elections when he was the prime minister.

The Modi era redrafted the Centre-state equations for the BJP. The party's walk-off grand slam in MP, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh in 2013, months after Modi was positioned as its PM candidate, was ascribed to the ambience, the "hawa" he whipped up. The MP and Chhattisgarh chief ministers, who secured a third consecutive victory, relegated themselves to the background, lest they be seen as pretenders to the Delhi throne. Shivraj Singh Chouhan was certainly perceived as one. The line demarcating the ebb and flow of politics in the states from the Centre became less conspicuous as every feather in a state's cap was reclaimed by the Centre when the present regime took over.

Of course, when the BJP was booted out in Delhi and Bihar, in Delhi, it was suspected "sabotage" by the capital's old guard who allegedly resented the "interloper" Kiran Bedi, who Shah sprung on them as the CM face one winter night. In Bihar, it was pinned down to intra-party dissensions and the inability to project a leader who could challenge Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad. There was not a mention of the possibility that the flip-flops the Centre staged over a new and peasant-unfriendly land acquisition law it wished to push through but jettisoned later might have triggered disquiet in Bihar. Or the discomfort that the optics from the PM's grandiose unveiling of a mega financial package for a perpetually cash-strapped state, as though Bihar had gone under the hammer, induced among people because it smacked of condescension.

So coming to the crucial question: if the balance sheet weighs on the side of debits for the BJP, who will take the rap, the Centre or state chieftains? Conversely, if the Congress springs a surprise or two, will Rahul walk away with the plaudits or will a compliment or two be portioned out to the election strategists/canvassers/managers such as Kamal Nath, Ashok Gehlot, Sachin Pilot and Tamradhwaj Sahu? What if the Congress is saddled with another defeat? Who will be culpable, Rahul or the state leaders?

Reading the balance sheets of the BJP and the Congress after December 11 will not be a cinch. As tactic or a pre-emptive move, Shah apparently yielded substantial space to the BJP chief ministers in nominating the candidates, avoiding the micro-management he was known for in Uttar Pradesh and Tripura. Was it intended to insulate Delhi against prospective failure and cop out of imminent culpability?

The sense among seasoned political observers is that contrary to speculation and inkling, MP, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh might not throw up different outcomes. Either the Congress takes them all or the BJP retains them. They argue that it is not as though Vasundhara Raje is several times more unpopular than Chouhan or Raman Singh. The rationale for this line of thinking is that in elections that are silently but largely dictated by economic management (or mismanagement), it is hard to separate the role played by the state governments from the Centre's. If demonetisation had crippled the rural economy, the marketplace in cities and small towns was burdened by the spin-offs from GST.

Note bandi and GST are extolled as the watermarks of the NDA government. December 11 will demonstrate if they are indeed.

Recent Messages ()

Please rate before posting your Review

OR PROCEED WITHOUT REGISTRATION

Share on Twitter

SIGN IN WITH

Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.